Not really agreeing with this whole Battlefield DNA thing. Throughout the years, Dice has tried different things. What makes a BF game isn't individual mechanics, it's the overall game loop, which in my opinion would be Conquest. You work as squads to control the map best as possible. The maps generally give you enough room to find a play style that works best for you. I think it boils down to that.
If you're a developer, you should be aware of what's going on in the gaming market. You shouldn't be afraid of new ideas, and then possibly implementing them if they work for your game. If you're actually passionate about game development, you should be curious and influenced with what's going on in the gaming world. It's not a bad thing.
There's a difference between chasing trends to just try and get some quick cash, and genuinely believing it can make your game feel better. I think Dice's intentions for 2042 were mostly good, and kept to the overall formula of what is Battlefield. Where they went wrong were vehicle balancing, too many gimmicks, basic things like scoreboard and what firing mode you were in, lack of understanding of what makes maps good, and an endless list of bugs that have yet to be fixed.
But they are not building up from the battlefield original formula but just copying from other titles instead of follow its own root because they just want to save time and money also saw how much money all those titles make and all these BS.
